If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

UK - Joanna Yeates, 25, Clifton, Bristol, 17 Dec 2010 #13

Please read and thank this post, before posting in the thread. Anyone who doesn't read and thank the post, and then posts, will be given 1 warning to read the post and abide by the rules.

There are special rules that apply to this thread!
1. All discussion of case players must be by initial ONLY.
2. Others rules may be added at any time, depending on legalities, so remember to check this post frequently.

Some things to remember:

If you see a post that violates the TOS - report it by hitting the little red triangle (Alert button) in the upper right corner of the post. If you respond to the post, you will be held accountable as having broken the TOS.

WS does not allow bickering, name calling, snarky or rude remarks. Be aware that posts will be judged on AMERICAN standards, which may be different than those in the UK.

Please Do NOT tell others what to post.

Please Do NOT discuss moderation. If you have a question, PM a mod (you can find them via 'View Forum Leaders') or use the Alert button.

PLEASE use restraint in referring to those who have not been named as suspects and use initials only.
---

X Also, PhillB has done an excellent map of the area in question; it can be referred to here:

Terrific discussion and sleuthing so far - an incredible amount of work has been done by a good many talented WSers. Welcome to those new to the case! Excellent links to information from media abound within the threads; familiarizing yourself with the case will enhance your understanding of the case discussion.

So, if the case against VT collapses in court, and LE later discovers who really killed JY and brings that person to court, will they count that as has having "solved" two murders, or will they count it as "solving" the same murder twice over?

Something fishy in all this 'solving', it seems to me!

Joking aside, that's the thing that most worries me.

Originally Posted by veggiefan

On the subject of "solving" crimes, I've just remembered that many years ago I had my car stolen from a council car park. The police were doubtful that I'd ever see it again, but to my amazement I had a call from someone in a nearby town about a week later, who said my car was blocking her drive, and did I know it wasn't locked? (She'd found my telephone number in a diary in the glove box).

I dutifully reported the recovery to the police, and the desk seargeant said "Congratulations, we'll record that as another crime solved, in that case".

Solved? I was flabbergasted!

Originally Posted by naturally suspicious

Just as an aside,I spoke to son and girlfriend today..she reported that PS is a very nice man...

Some may say this means nothing just an abbriviation and I guess I know who will be the first to dispute it, but ISIS come on this case is going nowhere. VT will be found guilty take the rap to satisfy the public and Js parents and later found inocent. IMO.

As regards the solution or detection of crimes, I decided to have a look around for some actual evidence (as opposed to relying on what newspapers say) and the rules on what counts as a solved crime can be found in a document entitled 'Home Office Counting Rules For Recorded Crime' - see http://rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdf...tgeneral10.pdf.

And so in order for any crime to qualify as 'solved' or detected then (inter alia) all the police have to do is ensure that a "person has been charged or summonsed for the crime (irrespective of any subsequent acquittal at Court)" and that the "evidence supporting the case must be sufficient to pass the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) evidential test"; i.e. that "a jury or bench of magistrates, properly directed in accordance with the law, is more likely than not to convict the defendant of the charge alleged".

Thus the JY murder already counts as being solved under Hole Office rules - (I was wrong before, mea culpa, we don't have to wait for the trial to begin) - although there do appear to be certain circumstances in which the detection can later be cancelled.

Some may say this means nothing just an abbriviation and I guess I know who will be the first to dispute it, but ISIS come on this case is going nowhere. VT will be found guilty take the rap to satisfy the public and Js parents and later found inocent. IMO.

Some may say this means nothing just an abbriviation and I guess I know who will be the first to dispute it, but ISIS come on this case is going nowhere. VT will be found guilty take the rap to satisfy the public and Js parents and later found inocent. IMO.

Originally Posted by Cherwell

What'choo talkin' 'bout, Willis?

Well, quite. ISiS simply stands for Improving Services in Somerset, which was simply an initiative launched a number of years ago by Somerset County Council and Taunton Deane Borough Council to shift some of their back office functions into the private sector and thus save money, and which eventually led to the establishment of a joint-venture with IBM known as Southwest One (see http://www.southwestone.co.uk/) which now includes Avon and Somerset Police.

Granted, there may be a number of questions worth asking. Such as, how can the public be assured that Southwest One will actually deliver cost savings etc etc. But for the life of me, I can't see how this effects the investigation of any particular crime that has been committed in the area covered by A&SC.